The main legal point established in the judgment is that term limits imposed under Section 44(2) of the Act are constitutionally valid, as they aim to prevent concentration of power and promote democratic participation in society management.

H.G.RAMESH, J.

Whether restriction of term limits imposed by the Parliament under Section 44(2) of the multistate cooperative societies Act, 2002 for seeking reelection to the post of President of a multistate cooperative society is constitutionally valid? This is the question that requires determination in this writ petition. The question is answered in the affirmative. For clarity, it is necessary to state that there is difference between term limits and term lengths. Term limits limit the number of terms or number of times a person can be elected to office. Term lengths denote duration of a term.

2. The case of the petitioner is that he was elected as President of the Central Arecanut & Cocoa Marketing and Processing Cooperative Ltd. (CAMPCO Ltd.) which is a multistate cooperative society and his term is coming to an end shortly. His grievance is that, in view of Section 44(2) of the multistate cooperative societies Act, 2002 (‘the Act’), he is not eligible to seek reelection to the post of President as he has held the office of President during two consecutive terms, either full or part. According to the petitioner, Section 44(2) of the Act which imposes restriction on seeking reelection to the post of President is violative of Articles 14 & 19(1)(c) of the Constitution of India, and therefore, it is unconstitutional.

3. Section 44 of the multistate cooperative societies Act, 2002 reads as follows:

“44. Prohibition to hold office of chairperson or president or vicechairperson or vicepresident in certain cases.?(1) No member of a board shall be eligible to be elected as the chairperson or president or vicechairperson or vicepresident of a multiState cooperative society if such member is a Minister in the Central Government or a State Government.

(2) No member of a board shall be eligible to be elected as the chairperson or president of a multiState cooperative society, after he has held the office as such during two consecutive terms, whether full or part:

Provided that a member who has ceased to hold the office of the chairperson or president continuously for one full term shall again be eligible for election to the office as such.

Explanation.?Where any member holding the office of the chairperson or president at the commencement of this Act is again elected to that office after such commencement, he shall for the purpose of this section, be deemed to have held office for one term before such election.”

(Emphasis supplied)

4. Sri K.G.Raghavan, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that the right to form a Cooperative Society under Article 19(1)(c) of the Constitution is not restricted only to the initial stage of forming a Cooperative Society. It includes right to administer it and right to continue the cooperative society with its own composition. According to the learned Senior Counsel, the impugned provision will interfere with the composition of a multistate cooperative society, and therefore, it is violative of Article 19(1)(c) of the Constitution. He submitted that cooperative societies are democratic organisations and their affairs should be administered by persons elected in a manner agreed to by the members. Restricting the right of members of a board (board of directors) to seek reelection to the post of President and restricting the right of a Board to elect a President of its choice will be against democratic functioning of a cooperative society. He also submitted that whether a member of a Board deserves more terms as President should best be left to the Board. According to the learned Senior Counsel, there is no rationale in restricting the right to seek reelection, and therefore, Section 44(2) of the Act is arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.

In support of the writ petition, he referred to the following decisions:

1. AIR 1962 SC 171, A.I.B.E. Assocn. v. N.I. Tribunal

2. 1971 (1) SCC 678, Damyanti Naranga v. Union of India

3. (1988)2 SCC 433, L.N.M. Instit